People who regularly experience street harassment learn to navigate public spaces nimbly, but with anxiety. They might reconfigure their commutes or slip headphones in their ears to look like they can't hear catcalls or whistles.

A new street harassment reporting app aims to help users log unwanted encounters by monitoring incidents in real time and submitting them to their council member. At the same time, though, it raises questions about the definition of "street harassment" and who determines how it should be punished, if at all.

Emily May co-founded anti-street harassment nonprofit Hollaback! in 2005 to document the experiences of women and members of the LGBT community. May was often told that a certain amount of unwanted contact was "the price" that women, gay, and gender non-conforming people paid for being in society, and she wanted to highlight the everyday irritations they were expected to shrug off.

The testimonies on Hollaback!'s messageboard are probably familiar to many. "A man followed me on the bike and then circled around me, making comments, telling me to smile and come with him," wrote one woman, describing a trip home from a Sacramento Amtrak station. A submission from a disabled, pre-op transgender man says, "I'm partially handicapped by [rheumatoid arthritis] and have had caregivers help. One [male-to-female trans friend] I used to live with got so fed up with the attitudes in the neighborhood she quit." The writer's new aide has had to fend off blow-job requests from the landlord, he wrote. These types of encounters are routine for 84 percent of women who have considered changing their behavior, such as choosing new routes or avoiding being alone in public, to avoid being harassed.

"There are kinds of things that are drip, drip, drip persistent--not cutting or injuring you--but persistently denigrating behavior that can feel bad and be scary."

Street harassment is problematic because it deviates from unspoken rules about the way strangers should interact. As Cynthia Grant Bowman wrote in her 1993 Harvard Law Review article "Street Harassment and the Informal Ghettoization of Women," normal public interactions, especially those in big cities, are conducted under a guise of "civil inattention." Strangers typically "perform an avoidance ritual" of making brief eye contact, disengaging, and continuing on their way. There are obviously some nuances--a wordless nod or smile, a quick "hello," or "excuse me," a brief exchange of banter--but, in general, most people tacitly agree to give each other space and expect the same in return. Instead, street harassment becomes a massive game of I'm Not Touching You. Sure, not all street harassment involves aggressive physical contact, but even the nicest of compliments becomes bothersome if it's delivered with disregard for someone else's personal space or an expectation that the recipient be grateful.

That's where Hollaback! comes in. The original app, released in 2010, was basically a mobile extension of the website. However, the newest version released last month for use in New York City functions as a street-harassment reporting tool. The app was granted $20,000 in 2011 with support from New York City council member Julissa Ferreras, the current Chair of the Committee on Women's Issues, and is free. More recently, former mayoral candidate and city council Speaker Christine Quinn threw her support behind the latest iteration. (I called Quinn's office for comment and was directed to this press release.) The home screen lets access "Resources" or "Know Your Rights," and it also includes a map with balloons that reveal street harassment clusters. In addition to posting incidents, users can plot their location manually or via GPS, noting the area and type of location (borough, school, business); enter demographic information (race, gender); and attach a picture of an incident they witnessed or experienced. If users opt in to the feature, those reports then go to their district's database and Councilstat. (Council members who receive complaints in their district will have access, not the mayor.)

But even though the NYPD will not receive the reports, the feature makes some anti-street-harassment advocates nervous. Some are wary of entrusting demographic data with New York City government, while others believe the movement's history of grassroots action will be displaced by government intervention.

May insists that Hollaback!'s mission aligns with public desire for "community-based responses that are about education and mobilization [rather than] more police responses." In the past, Hollaback! has organized safety audits to assess the conditions of particular areas where pedestrians seem to be vulnerable to harassment. Council member Ferreras coordinated with the group to conduct the first one in Queens last year. The patrol resulted in the replacement of street light bulbs and working payphones, which May says "make a space feel safer, and therefore be safer." Ferreras's communications director, Megan Montalvo, said the district hadn't received any formal complaints, "but as a council woman and someone who grew up in the district, street harassment was something [Ferreras] noticed." May sees the app as an extension of these types of grassroots efforts.

The executive director says collecting data enables local organizations to make tailored adjustments, rather than sweeping, citywide ones ordained by law. "If we learn that this is happening to primarily women of color," she explained, "[we can] make sure there are educational workshops and campaigns designed with them in mind." She also envisions greater support for anti-street harassment ad campaigns like the one Hollaback!'s Philadelphia branch launched on SEPTA trains, which will run through October. May believes advancement for these initiatives requires some government involvement.

"When I started doing advocacy work with Hollaback!, council members received reports anecdotally and wanted to do something, but there was nobody educating them in a substantive way," May says. "They were turning toward increased criminalization. Council members approached us with a number of laws they came up with on their own terms that we don't endorse," such as fewer chances and more jail time, tactics May thinks are a quick fix.

Related Story

Currently, no specific law penalizes "street harassment," but violations may be prosecuted in other ways. Acts like flashing and public masturbation may be deemed disorderly conduct, depending on the state, and are typically regarded as misdemeanors. In New York City, where the Hollaback! app is being piloted, those offenses could result in a $250 fine, a jail sentence of up to 15 days, or a conditional discharge for first-time offenders. Street harassment on public transit is addressed in similar ways. Still, verbal harassment--probably the most common kind of street harassment--usually goes unpunished. That's why Cornell professor Cynthia Grant Bowman advocates for some kind of legal deterrent that acknowledges that targets of street harassment are negatively impacted by the experience.

"There are kinds of things that are drip, drip, drip persistent--not cutting or injuring you--but persistently denigrating behavior that can feel bad and be scary," she said in a phone interview. "The idea is that the body politic takes [street harassment] seriously and wants to protect women from it; that it understands it has harmful consequences and isn't a joking matter. If it was physical, you would have a cause of action. This would be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine; it wouldn't be a huge, criminal offense that would follow you around for the rest of your life." Still, what may seem like a small financial burden for one person may be totally unaffordable for another, and Bowman has acknowledged that these cases may be handled differently depending on the race of the parties involved.

In her 1993 article, Bowman illustrated the insufficiencies of conflating street harassment with assault by citing one case that was "decided upon openly racist grounds" and another that "measured the defendant's conduct [in] a transparently racist fashion." In the first, a black man was convicted in North Carolina for harassing a white girl on the street since "[a] negro man, using this foul indecent language towards a young white girl, as a matter of common knowledge, would create apprehension and fear." In the second, assault charges against a white man driving an "expensive foreign car" who harassed three young, black women were dropped. The man alleged that he believed the women were prostitutes, and the court concluded that he could not be blamed for making that assumption. After all, as scholar and activist bell hooks (whom Bowman references) has noted, if black women are always seen as sexually available, it is impossible to make an unwanted sexual overture. The socioeconomic class and race of street harassment targets and perpetrators are undeniable factors in the way these encounters are judged.

"I think our frame is wrong. The point is to make harassment culturally unacceptable, and not treat other people this way."

Mariame Kaba, the director of Project NIA, a Chicago-based advocacy group that presents alternative ways of handling crime and violence said, "I support what Hollaback! does because it involves some form of accountability work. I'm all for using data to inform men and women about their community. But [a potential] partnership with police is not a community accountability model, and is problematic." Kaba fears that increased reliance on government funding might lead to eventual police interference. Some critics of the Hollaback! app believe partnering with the city is misguided.

When the update was first announced last year, the New York Daily Newscriticized the use of "public money to advance the [private] cause," and said that city residents should just call 911. On Twitter, Colorlines news editor Aura Bogado wrote, "The candidate who supported stop and frisk (and racial profiling) for a decade launches your app... and that's a good thing?" And for Professor Bowman, accumulating demographic data without clearly stating how it will be used places a greater burden on pedestrians. "I looked at that map and thought, 'Is this supposed to give me information about the corners to avoid?' Because that would actually be a perverse affect: It would interfere with my liberty by getting me to censor where I go." She reiterated that some legal sanction would make the biggest difference.

Miriame Kaba has a different take. "I think our frame is wrong," she said. "The point is to make harassment culturally unacceptable, and not treat other people this way. That's a lot of hard work that may involve community accountability circles, or restorative justice, but it should be any number of things before a law enforcement approach."

Kaba told me about her experience with YWAT (the Young Women's Action Team), an anti-street harassment group founded in 2003 that focused on the Rogers Park area of Chicago. That year, a group of teenagers who were frustrated with harassment in their neighborhood produced a report on the state of street harassment in their community. Eventually, YWAT would go on to conduct community audits, established a training program, published research, and traveled around the country to speak to other young people and adults about street harassment and violence against girls and young women.

Otherscholarshave also debated the conflicts that arise (alienation of the core audience and key organization members) when replacing a more collectivist structure with bureaucracy that includes state funding and staff.

It isn't inevitable that Hollaback!'s partnership with the New York city council will lead to the unfair policing of certain people, classes, or communities. Still, I asked May how she felt about the pall cast over the alliance, given Speaker Quinn's association with New York's controversial stop-and-frisk policy. "Well," she replied. "It sucks."

"As an organization, we see stop-and-frisk as a form of harassment, and we don't agree with the assertions of any politician that would support it," May continued. "I wish I could separate the politics out of it, but I realize that's almost impossible to do. When you work with any politician you get their baggage along with them. But I think Speaker Quinn is a person, and an individual, and someone who cares about street harassment. [Her participation] is a sign that city government would be willing to collect real-time reports on street harassment, and acknowledge that this is going to take more of an investment."

About the Author

Most Popular

Two hundred fifty years of slavery. Ninety years of Jim Crow. Sixty years of separate but equal. Thirty-five years of racist housing policy. Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole.

And if thy brother, a Hebrew man, or a Hebrew woman, be sold unto thee, and serve thee six years; then in the seventh year thou shalt let him go free from thee. And when thou sendest him out free from thee, thou shalt not let him go away empty: thou shalt furnish him liberally out of thy flock, and out of thy floor, and out of thy winepress: of that wherewith the LORD thy God hath blessed thee thou shalt give unto him. And thou shalt remember that thou wast a bondman in the land of Egypt, and the LORD thy God redeemed thee: therefore I command thee this thing today.

— Deuteronomy 15: 12–15

Besides the crime which consists in violating the law, and varying from the right rule of reason, whereby a man so far becomes degenerate, and declares himself to quit the principles of human nature, and to be a noxious creature, there is commonly injury done to some person or other, and some other man receives damage by his transgression: in which case he who hath received any damage, has, besides the right of punishment common to him with other men, a particular right to seek reparation.

Writing used to be a solitary profession. How did it become so interminably social?

Whether we’re behind the podium or awaiting our turn, numbing our bottoms on the chill of metal foldout chairs or trying to work some life into our terror-stricken tongues, we introverts feel the pain of the public performance. This is because there are requirements to being a writer. Other than being a writer, I mean. Firstly, there’s the need to become part of the writing “community”, which compels every writer who craves self respect and success to attend community events, help to organize them, buzz over them, and—despite blitzed nerves and staggering bowels—present and perform at them. We get through it. We bully ourselves into it. We dose ourselves with beta blockers. We drink. We become our own worst enemies for a night of validation and participation.

Even when a dentist kills an adored lion, and everyone is furious, there’s loftier righteousness to be had.

Now is the point in the story of Cecil the lion—amid non-stop news coverage and passionate social-media advocacy—when people get tired of hearing about Cecil the lion. Even if they hesitate to say it.

But Cecil fatigue is only going to get worse. On Friday morning, Zimbabwe’s environment minister, Oppah Muchinguri, called for the extradition of the man who killed him, the Minnesota dentist Walter Palmer. Muchinguri would like Palmer to be “held accountable for his illegal action”—paying a reported $50,000 to kill Cecil with an arrow after luring him away from protected land. And she’s far from alone in demanding accountability. This week, the Internet has served as a bastion of judgment and vigilante justice—just like usual, except that this was a perfect storm directed at a single person. It might be called an outrage singularity.

Most of the big names in futurism are men. What does that mean for the direction we’re all headed?

In the future, everyone’s going to have a robot assistant. That’s the story, at least. And as part of that long-running narrative, Facebook just launched its virtual assistant. They’re calling it Moneypenny—the secretary from the James Bond Films. Which means the symbol of our march forward, once again, ends up being a nod back. In this case, Moneypenny is a send-up to an age when Bond’s womanizing was a symbol of manliness and many women were, no matter what they wanted to be doing, secretaries.

Why can’t people imagine a future without falling into the sexist past? Why does the road ahead keep leading us back to a place that looks like the Tomorrowland of the 1950s? Well, when it comes to Moneypenny, here’s a relevant datapoint: More than two thirds of Facebook employees are men. That’s a ratio reflected among another key group: futurists.

Forget credit hours—in a quest to cut costs, universities are simply asking students to prove their mastery of a subject.

MANCHESTER, Mich.—Had Daniella Kippnick followed in the footsteps of the hundreds of millions of students who have earned university degrees in the past millennium, she might be slumping in a lecture hall somewhere while a professor droned. But Kippnick has no course lectures. She has no courses to attend at all. No classroom, no college quad, no grades. Her university has no deadlines or tenure-track professors.

Instead, Kippnick makes her way through different subject matters on the way to a bachelor’s in accounting. When she feels she’s mastered a certain subject, she takes a test at home, where a proctor watches her from afar by monitoring her computer and watching her over a video feed. If she proves she’s competent—by getting the equivalent of a B—she passes and moves on to the next subject.

During the multi-country press tour for Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation, not even Jon Stewart has dared ask Tom Cruise about Scientology.

During the media blitz for Mission Impossible: Rogue Nation over the past two weeks, Tom Cruise has seemingly been everywhere. In London, he participated in a live interview at the British Film Institute with the presenter Alex Zane, the movie’s director, Christopher McQuarrie, and a handful of his fellow cast members. In New York, he faced off with Jimmy Fallon in a lip-sync battle on The Tonight Show and attended the Monday night premiere in Times Square. And, on Tuesday afternoon, the actor recorded an appearance on The Daily Show With Jon Stewart, where he discussed his exercise regimen, the importance of a healthy diet, and how he still has all his own hair at 53.

Stewart, who during his career has won two Peabody Awards for public service and the Orwell Award for “distinguished contribution to honesty and clarity in public language,” represented the most challenging interviewer Cruise has faced on the tour, during a challenging year for the actor. In April, HBO broadcast Alex Gibney’s documentary Going Clear, a film based on the book of the same title by Lawrence Wright exploring the Church of Scientology, of which Cruise is a high-profile member. The movie alleges, among other things, that the actor personally profited from slave labor (church members who were paid 40 cents an hour to outfit the star’s airplane hangar and motorcycle), and that his former girlfriend, the actress Nazanin Boniadi, was punished by the Church by being forced to do menial work after telling a friend about her relationship troubles with Cruise. For Cruise “not to address the allegations of abuse,” Gibney said in January, “seems to me palpably irresponsible.” But in The Daily Show interview, as with all of Cruise’s other appearances, Scientology wasn’t mentioned.

An attack on an American-funded military group epitomizes the Obama Administration’s logistical and strategic failures in the war-torn country.

Last week, the U.S. finally received some good news in Syria:.After months of prevarication, Turkey announced that the American military could launch airstrikes against Islamic State positions in Syria from its base in Incirlik. The development signaled that Turkey, a regional power, had at last agreed to join the fight against ISIS.

The announcement provided a dose of optimism in a conflict that has, in the last four years, killed over 200,000 and displaced millions more. Days later, however, the positive momentum screeched to a halt. Earlier this week, fighters from the al-Nusra Front, an Islamist group aligned with al-Qaeda, reportedly captured the commander of Division 30, a Syrian militia that receives U.S. funding and logistical support, in the countryside north of Aleppo. On Friday, the offensive escalated: Al-Nusra fighters attacked Division 30 headquarters, killing five and capturing others. According to Agence France Presse, the purpose of the attack was to obtain sophisticated weapons provided by the Americans.

The Islamic State is no mere collection of psychopaths. It is a religious group with carefully considered beliefs, among them that it is a key agent of the coming apocalypse. Here’s what that means for its strategy—and for how to stop it.

What is the Islamic State?

Where did it come from, and what are its intentions? The simplicity of these questions can be deceiving, and few Western leaders seem to know the answers. In December, The New York Times published confidential comments by Major General Michael K. Nagata, the Special Operations commander for the United States in the Middle East, admitting that he had hardly begun figuring out the Islamic State’s appeal. “We have not defeated the idea,” he said. “We do not even understand the idea.” In the past year, President Obama has referred to the Islamic State, variously, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team,” statements that reflected confusion about the group, and may have contributed to significant strategic errors.

The Wall Street Journal’s eyebrow-raising story of how the presidential candidate and her husband accepted cash from UBS without any regard for the appearance of impropriety that it created.

The Swiss bank UBS is one of the biggest, most powerful financial institutions in the world. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton intervened to help it out with the IRS. And after that, the Swiss bank paid Bill Clinton $1.5 million for speaking gigs. TheWall Street Journal reported all that and more Thursday in an article that highlights huge conflicts of interest that the Clintons have created in the recent past.

The piece begins by detailing how Clinton helped the global bank.

“A few weeks after Hillary Clinton was sworn in as secretary of state in early 2009, she was summoned to Geneva by her Swiss counterpart to discuss an urgent matter. The Internal Revenue Service was suing UBS AG to get the identities of Americans with secret accounts,” the newspaper reports. “If the case proceeded, Switzerland’s largest bank would face an impossible choice: Violate Swiss secrecy laws by handing over the names, or refuse and face criminal charges in U.S. federal court. Within months, Mrs. Clinton announced a tentative legal settlement—an unusual intervention by the top U.S. diplomat. UBS ultimately turned over information on 4,450 accounts, a fraction of the 52,000 sought by the IRS.”

Some say the so-called sharing economy has gotten away from its central premise—sharing.

This past March, in an up-and-coming neighborhood of Portland, Maine, a group of residents rented a warehouse and opened a tool-lending library. The idea was to give locals access to everyday but expensive garage, kitchen, and landscaping tools—such as chainsaws, lawnmowers, wheelbarrows, a giant cider press, and soap molds—to save unnecessary expense as well as clutter in closets and tool sheds.

The residents had been inspired by similar tool-lending libraries across the country—in Columbus, Ohio; in Seattle, Washington; in Portland, Oregon. The ethos made sense to the Mainers. “We all have day jobs working to make a more sustainable world,” says Hazel Onsrud, one of the Maine Tool Library’s founders, who works in renewable energy. “I do not want to buy all of that stuff.”